*Remember the rules apply only to federal district courts not appellate courts
A. Damages (pages 261-281)
(1) Compensatory Damages (economic and non-economic)
i. Economic (tangible or actual damages) – damages that will compensate the plaintiff for money he has either lost or has had to pay. (ex. Lost wages, hospital bills)
ii. Non-Economic (also called intangible damages or non-pecuniary damages) – damages that will compensate the plaintiff for injury which was not economic. Damages which cannot be measured in money (Ex. Pain and suffering, emotional distress, and harm to reputation). Measuring these provides a challenge as they are not easily defined.
(2) Liquidated Damages- Damages agreed to by parties beforehand. “An amount contractually stipulated as a reasonable estimation of actual damages to be recovered by one party if the other party is in breach”
i. Most commonly found in contract cases. (Ex. Parties would agree when making the contract on the amount of damages for a breach of the contract)
ii. Parties may not agree to liquidated damages unless the actual damages would be difficult to calculate.(Ex, cannot agree to $1,00 in liquidated damages for failure to pay a $500 debt)
(3) Statutory Damages- damages specifically set or limited by statute rather than common law. Common example is the damages laid out in the Copyright Act. Also occurs in small transactions like bad check statutes.
i. The theory underlying minimum damages amounts is partly punitive.
(4) Punitive Damages (Exemplary damages)
(a) Purpose and predicate for granting punitive damages
i. Aimed entirely at punishment and making an example to others. Require intentional not negligent conduct. In some jurisdictions seeking punitive damages means the plaintiff can introduce evidence of the defendant’s net worth as that is needed to decide what would hurt defendant.
ii. Debate. One view- punitive damages are wildly unpredictable and out of control and have little correlation to the harm done or the degree of bad behavior. Other view- punitive damages are rare, only in 6% of cases and median award is about $50,000 which is equal to the median compensatory damages award.
(b) Due process limits on excessive punitive damages
i. The Supreme Court in Honda Motor Co. v. Oberg required appellate review of a punitive damages award. A subsequent case required the review to be de novo(“anew”- means the appellate court reviews the case as if it had not been heard before by the district court)
j. State Farm v. Campbell
a. Campbell was driving, passed six trucks. Sues his insurance company for not settling his case which was a national policy to lower payouts on insurance claims. Jury found for Campbell and awarded $1 million compensatory and $145 million punitive.
b. Appeal was a challenge to the constitutionality of the punitive damages award based upon the due process clause.
c. Court held that punitive damages award was acceptable but that the damages were excessive. Excessive punitive damages violate due process. Fourteenth amendment provides that a State shall not deprive any person of property without due process of law. Excessive punitive damages can also be seen as cruel and unusual punishment under the 8th amendment.
d. Rules: Punitive damages should be based on 1) the reprehensibility of conduct, 2) the disparity between the actual or potential harm suffered by the plaintiff and the punitive damages awarded by the jury, and 3
not be hard for Harris to find a job which does not break the restrictive covenant)
c. Rule- granting an injunction is based on a balance between the interests of the plaintiff and the interest of the defendant and the relative harm to each. In addition there has to be no adequate legal remedy for the plaintiff (meaning a remedy historically available in a court of law rather than a court of equity- usually monetary damages, others include recovery of personal property and land. Court does not go into this really at all, they just mention it)
(2) Preliminary Injunctions- “a temporary injunction issued before or during a trial to prevent an irreparable injury from occurring before the court has a chance to decide the case.”
i. Rule 65(a) and (c)- (a)Preliminary Injunctions can be issued only on notice to the adverse party. (c) Preliminary injunction can be ordered only if movant gives security to pay the costs of a party who is found to have been wrongly restrained or enjoined. (d)The order must state the reasons why it issued, state specific terms, and describe the acts restrained.
ii. William Inglis & Sons v. Continental Baking
a. Plaintiffs contend that defendant’s are guilty of discriminatory and below cost pricing. They are seeking a preliminary injunction.
b. Court held there are two tests which must be considered when deciding whether to grant a preliminary injunction.